Fix test flakiness due to using inconsistent time.

[vincentwschau]

Changelist

Use start of hour in tests to fix flaky test issues.

Test Plan

[Describe how this PR was tested (if applicable)]

Author/Reviewer Checklist

• If this PR has changes that result in a different app state given the same prior state and transaction list, manually add the state-breaking label.
• If the PR has breaking postgres changes to the indexer add the indexer-postgres-breaking label.
• If this PR isn't state-breaking but has changes that modify behavior in PrepareProposal or ProcessProposal, manually add the label proposal-breaking.
• If this PR is one of many that implement a specific feature, manually label them all feature:[feature-name].
• If you wish to for mergify-bot to automatically create a PR to backport your change to a release branch, manually add the label backport/[branch-name].
• Manually add any of the following labels: refactor, chore, bug.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Adjusted the calculation of blockTime for specific PnlTicks, ensuring accurate aggregation based on hourly timestamps.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request focus on the aggregateHourlyPnlTicks function within the test suite of the comlink service. Modifications were made to the calculation of blockTime for specific PnlTicksFromDatabase instances, ensuring that the blockTime aligns with the start of the hour plus an additional minute. This adjustment affects how the ticks are aggregated based on their timestamps, while the overall structure of the tests remains unchanged.

Changes

File Path	Change Summary
indexer/services/comlink/tests/lib/helpers.test.ts	Adjusted blockTime calculation for pnlTick3 and pnlTick4 to align with the start of the hour plus one minute.

Possibly related PRs

• Fix bug with PnL aggregation. #2446: This PR modifies the aggregatePnlTicks function to aggregateHourlyPnlTicks, which directly relates to the changes made in the main PR regarding the aggregateHourlyPnlTicks function and its handling of blockTime for PnL ticks.
• Filter out to single tick per interval. #2403: This PR introduces a filtering function for PnL ticks, which aligns with the main PR's focus on adjusting how blockTime is calculated for PnL ticks, ensuring accurate aggregation based on timestamps.
• Get latest hourly tick to compute final tick for megavault PnL. #2454: This PR enhances the retrieval of the latest hourly PnL tick, which is relevant to the main PR's changes in the aggregateHourlyPnlTicks function and its implications for how ticks are aggregated based on their timestamps.

Suggested labels

indexer

Suggested reviewers

• shrenujb

🐰 In the garden where the ticks align,
A minute added, oh how they shine!
With blockTime set, the hour's embrace,
Aggregation dances, keeping pace.
Hopping through tests, we cheer and play,
For every tick counts in a joyful way! 🌼

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between c8f8a4a and a67b4df.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• indexer/services/comlink/tests/lib/helpers.test.ts (2 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🔇 Additional comments (4)

indexer/services/comlink/__tests__/lib/helpers.test.ts (4)

871-871: Ensure consistent time calculation for pnlTick3.

The blockTime2 calculation has been modified to use the start of the hour plus 61 minutes. This change ensures that pnlTick3 is consistently placed at the beginning of the next hour, which aligns with the purpose of testing hourly aggregation.

---

883-883: Ensure consistent time calculation for pnlTick4.

Similar to the change for pnlTick3, the blockTime3 calculation now uses the start of the hour plus 62 minutes. This modification ensures that pnlTick4 is consistently placed 1 minute after pnlTick3 in the next hour, which is crucial for testing the aggregation of ticks within the same hour.

---

Line range hint 871-883: Summary of changes to aggregateHourlyPnlTicks test

The modifications to blockTime2 and blockTime3 calculations improve the consistency of the test case by ensuring that:

1. pnlTick3 is always placed at the beginning of the next hour (61 minutes after the start of the previous hour).
2. pnlTick4 is always placed 1 minute after pnlTick3 in the next hour (62 minutes after the start of the previous hour).

These changes enhance the reliability of the test case for hourly aggregation. However, please ensure that the test assertions still correctly validate the aggregation logic with these new timings.

---

Line range hint 871-883: Verify the impact on test assertions.

The changes to blockTime2 and blockTime3 calculations affect the timing of pnlTick3 and pnlTick4. Please ensure that the test assertions in the expect block (which starts at line 897) still correctly validate the aggregation logic with these new timings.

To verify this, you can run the following script:

Please review the output to ensure that the test assertions still correctly validate the aggregation logic with the new timings.

✅ Verification successful

Test assertions remain valid. The aggregation logic correctly accounts for the updated blockTime2 and blockTime3 timings, and the test assertions continue to validate the aggregation as intended.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check if the test assertions for aggregateHourlyPnlTicks are still valid

# Search for the expect block in the aggregateHourlyPnlTicks test
rg -A 20 "const aggregatedPnlTicks: PnlTicksFromDatabase\[\] = aggregateHourlyPnlTicks" indexer/services/comlink/__tests__/lib/helpers.test.ts

# Output the entire test case for manual review
echo "Full test case for manual review:"
rg -A 100 "it\('aggregates multiple pnl ticks same height'" indexer/services/comlink/__tests__/lib/helpers.test.ts

Length of output: 5019

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.